This informal CPD article, ‘Why neurodiversity leadership training matters—and how a lack of support can set leaders up to fail’ was provided by Toni Horn FRSA, Founder of NeuroEmpower CIC, who are passionate about creating a more inclusive world for neurodivergent individuals. They specialise in delivering evidence-informed training, coaching, and consultancy services to support neurodiversity in education, the workplace, and everyday life.
We expect leaders to manage performance, resolve conflict, support wellbeing and help their teams succeed. To do this effectively, they need to understand that people think, communicate, process information and organise their work differently. When organisations give leaders responsibility for supporting others without providing the training and resources to do it well, they risk setting them up to fail. Employees can then be left navigating misunderstandings, inconsistent support and working practices that prevent them from demonstrating their abilities.
Neurodiversity leadership training
Neurodiversity leadership training belongs within continuing professional development because these differences influence everyday management decisions. The wider leadership training gap is significant. Research published in 2023 reported that 82% of people entering management positions had received no formal management or leadership training. This finding concerns management generally, but it highlights the risk of assuming that someone’s ability to do a job automatically prepares them to lead other people. (1)
The evidence on neuroinclusion raises further concerns. A 2024 report, drawing on responses from 1,003 employer representatives, found that only 24% said their organisation offered managers training or guidance on supporting neurodivergent colleagues. Just 18% provided training on responding when an employee or applicant shared that they were neurodivergent. (2)
More recently, a survey published in March 2026 found that 35% of 1,000 employees surveyed across Great Britain considered their employer ineffective at training managers to identify and make reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent employees. This measures employees’ perceptions of their organisation’s training, rather than directly assessing managers’ competence. (3)
These findings make a strong case for examining whether the support organisations provide matches what they expect their leaders to deliver.
Understanding neurodiversity
Neurodiversity describes variation in how human brains function. Neurodivergent people, including autistic people and people with ADHD, dyslexia or dyspraxia, may experience particular strengths, needs and barriers at work. However, a diagnosis does not provide a complete guide to an individual.
One employee may benefit from written instructions. Another may need time to process questions before responding. Someone else may find that frequent interruptions make it difficult to complete work accurately. Effective leadership involves understanding the person and agreeing practical ways to meet the requirements of their role. Without that understanding, differences can become a source of conflict between an employee and their line manager.
Consider an illustrative situation: an employee repeatedly asks which task should take priority. Their manager interprets this as a lack of independence. The employee feels increasingly frustrated because several tasks have been described as urgent, with no clear order. The manager sees repeated questioning; the employee experiences unclear expectations. If neither perspective is explored, a manageable communication issue can become a difficult relationship.
Rejection sensitive dysphoria
Rejection sensitivity
Rejection sensitivity can add another layer to these interactions. Rejection sensitive dysphoria, often shortened to RSD, is a term used to describe intense emotional pain associated with rejection, criticism or perceived failure. It is often discussed in relation to ADHD. RSD is not a formally recognised medical diagnosis, and research specifically examining it remains limited. Leaders should understand the experience without assuming that every neurodivergent employee has it. (4)
A small qualitative study published in 2026 explored rejection sensitivity through interviews with five undergraduate students with ADHD. Participants described distress, physical sensations, masking and withdrawal. The study offers insight into individual experiences; its size and student sample limit how widely its findings can be generalised. (5)
In a workplace conversation, it is useful to consider how this might affect the exchange between an employee and their manager. For example, a manager sends a brief message: “We need to talk about your performance.” They intend to discuss a specific piece of work. An employee who experiences rejection sensitivity may interpret the uncertainty as a sign that their job or professional reputation is at risk.
During the meeting, the employee becomes quiet, struggles to explain their perspective or gives a lengthy explanation. The manager may interpret this as disengagement or defensiveness and press for an immediate answer. The employee becomes more overwhelmed, and both leave feeling unheard. This is an illustrative scenario, rather than a diagnosis of either person. It demonstrates why leaders need skills in managing the interaction as well as discussing the work.
A more constructive approach would make the purpose clear: “I’d like to discuss the deadlines on these two tasks, understand what affected them and agree what happens next.” The manager could provide the examples in advance, invite the employee’s perspective and agree a pause if the discussion becomes difficult to continue productively. Feedback still needs to be clear and honest. Leaders can make it specific, explain the required outcome and give the employee a reasonable opportunity to process and respond.
Understanding rejection sensitivity must also sit alongside examining whether criticism was fair, expectations were clear and the manager’s own behaviour was appropriate. An employee’s concern should never be dismissed simply because they experience RSD or are neurodivergent.
Effective leadership CPD
The potential seriousness of workplace experiences is reflected in further employee research. Among the 790 respondents who identified as neurodivergent, 20% reported experiencing workplace harassment or discrimination because of their neurodivergence. This employee sample was unweighted and not nationally representative, so the figure describes those surveyed. (6)
For leadership CPD to be useful, it should connect understanding with practical action. Training should give leaders opportunities to:
- Communicate clearly: agree priorities, explain deadlines and check shared understanding.
- Explore barriers: consider processing time, working memory, sensory environments, interruptions and workload.
- Handle feedback thoughtfully: use specific examples, invite discussion and agree how to continue if someone becomes overwhelmed.
- Respond to conflict: explore both perspectives, check assumptions and address inappropriate behaviour.
- Agree and review support: understand adjustment processes, involve the employee and seek specialist advice where needed.
Final thoughts
Leaders themselves may also be neurodivergent. Their development and working arrangements should be accessible, and they need opportunities to seek support for their own responsibilities. Training should be backed by the organisation. A manager may understand what an employee needs but lack time, access to advice or authority to make changes. Acas recommends providing managers with training, resources, relevant specialist support, and sufficient time and authority to promote neuroinclusion. (7)
Organisations should also review what happens after training. Are expectations clearer? Do managers know how to respond to requests for support? Do employees experience the changes as helpful? What still needs action from senior leadership? We cannot expect leaders to support different ways of working through goodwill alone. They need the opportunity to learn, practise, reflect and receive support themselves.
We hope this article was helpful. For more information from NeuroEmpower please visit their CPD Member Directory page. Alternatively, please visit the CPD Industry Hubs for more CPD articles, courses and events relevant to your Continuing Professional Development requirements.
References
- Chartered Management Institute (2023). New study: Bad managers and toxic work culture causing one in three staff to walk. https://www.managers.org.uk/about-cmi/media-centre/press-releases/bad-managers-and-toxic-work-culture-causing-one-in-three-staff-to-walk/
- Thompson, E. and Miller, J. (2024). Neuroinclusion at work. Survey report. London: CIPD. https://www.cipd.org/globalassets/media/knowledge/knowledge-hub/reports/2024-pdfs/2024-neuroinclusion-at-work-report-8545.pdf
- Acas (2026). Employers are failing to support neurodiversity at work. https://www.acas.org.uk/employers-are-failing-to-support-neurodiversity-at-work
- Cleveland Clinic (2022). Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/24099-rejection-sensitive-dysphoria-rsd
- Rowney-Smith, A., Sutton, B., Quadt, L. and Eccles, J. A. (2026). The lived experiences of rejection sensitivity in ADHD—A qualitative exploration. PLOS ONE, 21(1), e0314669. Title reflects the published correction. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314669
- CIPD (2024). One in five neurodivergent employees have experienced harassment or discrimination at work because of their neurodivergence. https://www.cipd.org/en/about/press-releases/one-in-five-neurodivergent-employees-experienced-harassment-or-discrimination-at-work/
- Acas. Making your organisation neuroinclusive. Accessed 12 September 2026. https://www.acas.org.uk/neurodiversity-at-work/making-your-organisation-neuroinclusive
